[Educationforall] Some recent articles relevant for EFA

Sat Jan 9 19:44:15 UTC 2010

Below are some relevant articles to EFA. 

Justin

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/notion/513426/schools_over_prisons_student_protests_push_cal_governor_to_act

Schools Over Prisons: Student Protests Push Cal. Governor to Act 
posted by Jon Wiener on 01/07/2010 @ 3:59pm

Student protests against tuition increases at the 10-campus University of California system pushed Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to announce on Tuesday an initiative to guarantee that the state spends more on universities than it does on prisons. 

The central role of student protests is not just my theory; it's the explanation offered by the governor's own chief of staff. "Those protests on the U.C. campuses were the tipping point" for the governor, Susan Kennedy said in an interview with the New York Times. 

She was referring to the coordinated actions at the start of the fall term, when 5,000 students and workers, along with many faculty members, rallied at Berkeley, while 700 gathered at UCLA's Bruin Plaza. Simultaneous protests were held at Riverside, Irvine, and other campuses. (That story HERE). 

The university recently announced a 32 per cent increase in student fees for next year. It has long been held as a beacon of promise for young people, offering high quality education at relatively low cost. That era, many fear, is coming to an end. 

"The priorities have become out of whack over the years," the governor said in his final address to state legislators. "I mean, think about it, 30 years ago, 10 percent of the general fund went to higher education, and 3 percent went to prisons. Today, almost 11 percent goes to prisons, and only 7.5 percent goes to higher education." 

Schwarzenegger said he was "choosing universities over prisons," calling his proposal "a historic and transforming realignment of California's priorities." 

The governor's proposal is a constitutional amendment that requires either a two-thirds vote in the legislature or a majority vote in a referendum. 

Given the inability of the legislature to raise taxes, the governor's proposal in effect calls for cutting the prison budget and shifting those funds to the university. That pits students and the university against the powerful prison guards union and law-and-order Republicans in the state. 

That will be a battle worth fighting. 

Gov plans deep cuts to programs, and fed help
Wyatt Buchanan,Marisa Lagos, Chronicle Sacramento Bureau

Saturday, January 9, 2010

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

      Print E-mail Share Comments (333)  Font | Size:   

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(01-09) 04:00 PST Sacramento --

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger unveiled an $82.9 billion spending plan for California on Friday that relies on deep cuts in health and human services, prison spending and wages for state workers, and on billions in additional federal dollars that the state's U.S. senators indicated are unlikely to be granted.

IMAGES
 View More Images

VIDEO
View Larger Size

MORE NEWS
  a.. Video conferencing for the masses01.08.10 
  b.. Arrest made in Newark airport security breach 01.08.10 
  c.. Unruly man in jet loo brings military response 01.08.10
The governor declared a fiscal emergency to force the Legislature to start work quickly to solve the first $6.6 billion of a $20 billion shortfall faced by the state over the next 18 months. The remainder would be dealt with by June 30, as part of the regular budget process.

"I know many of these cuts are painful," the Republican governor said. "Believe me, these are the hardest decisions a government must make, yet there is simply no conceivable way to avoid more cuts and more pain."

Democrats quickly shot down most of the governor's plan, saying his cuts to services for poor, sick, disabled and elderly Californians were unacceptable.

"Many of our poor, elderly and most vulnerable people simply would not survive this budget," said state Sen. Leland Yee, D-San Francisco.

The governor also called for more than $2 billion in cuts to K-12 spending, despite his pledge two days prior to spare public schools and community colleges from cuts.

Initial salvo
The plan is the first salvo in the Sacramento budgeting process that will last at least through the summer. Initial proposals typically change significantly by the time the Legislature passes a budget.

The governor warned that cuts to state services will be even worse if the federal government refuses to give California $6.9 billion in additional funds he said the state is rightly owed.

Federal officials, including California Democratic Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, were cool to that idea. Without the extra federal dollars, the governor said he would completely eliminate the state's welfare-to-work program, the health insurance program for low-income children, and the in-home health support program that keeps disabled and sick people in their homes instead of nursing homes.

State Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, reacted swiftly, saying he supports the push for more federal dollars. As for the rest of the plan, "You've got to be kidding," he said.

Other lawmakers called it a recycled version of cuts turned down by the Legislature last year. Assembly Speaker Karen Bass, D-Baldwin Vista (Los Angeles County), characterized the proposal as a "pile of denial."

Republicans generally praised the governor's plan. Republican Senate leader Dennis Hollingsworth of Murrieta (Riverside County) said, "We all understand these are tough choices."

End to furloughs
As part of his proposal, the governor said he will end employee furloughs, which have effectively cut state workers' paychecks by 14 percent, but require public workers to take a 5 percent pay cut and double their retirement contributions from 5 percent to 10 percent - so that the state can contribute fewer dollars to the pension fund. Additionally, all department heads will be charged with reducing their payrolls by another 5 percent, which may include laying off state workers to achieve that goal.

Without the federal help, Schwarzenegger said he would seek an additional 5 percent pay cut for workers.

Union leaders and advocates for the environment, transportation, health care and human services reacted angrily to the proposal, saying that plans to cut health care, social services and workers' pay will harm the state's fragile economy, despite Schwarzenegger's pledge this week to focus on job and economic growth.

"After a long and painful recession, California's middle class needs a state budget that will stimulate the economy and help rebuild California. The governor's budget proposal fails miserably on both counts," said Bill Lloyd, president of the Services Employees International Union California, which represents 700,000 workers.

Schwarzenegger pledged to spare the University of California and California State University systems, and his proposal actually increases those budgets.

"While this proposed funding would be very welcome, it doesn't solve all of our problems," said UC spokesman Steve Montiel, who warned that cuts and layoffs may still be necessary.

Prisons would be cut by $1.2 billion, including reducing by $811 million the money that goes for prison health care that is overseen by a federal receiver. The receiver would have to agree to that reduction. Schwarzenegger also proposed keeping some nonviolent offenders in county jails instead of sending them to state prisons.

On the revenue side, the governor proposed eliminating the gas tax, which provides as much as $1 billion a year in transportation funds to counties, and replacing it with an excise tax that the state would keep. The goal is to sidestep an October court ruling that found that the state's $3.6 billion raid on the gas tax fund in recent years was illegal.

He also proposed installing cameras at traffic lights that would automatically generate tickets for people who speed through intersections, which is projected to bring nearly $338 million to the state.

Governor's budget proposals
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger included dozens of proposals in his budget plan Friday. Here's a look at some of them:

-- A new speed enforcement program would use red-light cameras to fine drivers speeding through intersections to raise $338 million in new revenue.

-- The state would spend $3.45 billion over 30 years to attract private companies and investors to become involved in construction and maintenance of state highways.

-- State law would be changed to lay off or reassign teachers regardless of seniority and allow schools to reduce the number of instructional days by up to five through 2012-13.

-- The state would introduce a 4.8 percent surcharge on all residential and commercial property insurance for fire and other state emergency response. The surcharge would generate $478 million in 2010-11.

-- The AIDS Drug Assistance Program was largely spared in the governor's latest proposal. The program will receive $97 million, though the $9.5 million for the ADAP program in county jails is being cut.

-- UC Hastings College of the Law, which was threatened last year with a near elimination of state funding, is spared in this proposal.

Spending plans
On Friday, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger unveiled a spending plan that included two components: one to close a $6.6 billion shortfall in the current fiscal year that ends June 30, and another to close a projected $13.3 billion gap for the new year that begins on July 1. The following table shows the two plans plus California's current spending levels, which were signed into law by the governor in July. The bottom line, under the governor's proposals, is that after the shortfalls are eliminated, California's general fund spending would drop by $1.6 billion from current levels.

      Agency 2009-10 Current spending 2009-10 Proposed changes to current spending 2010-11 Proposed spending plan for next fiscal year Change from 2009-10 (if revised) 
      Legislative, judicial, executive $1.9 billion $1.9 billion $2.8 billion 55% 
      State and consumer services $569 million $510 million $587 million 15 
      Business, transportation & housing $2.6 billion $2.7 billion $902 million -66 
      Natural resources (includes parks, water and Cal Fire) $1.8 billion $1.9 billion $1.7 billion -7 
      Environmental protection $73 million $69 million $68 million -1 
      Health & human services $25 billion $25 billion $21 billion -16 
      Prisons $8.2 billion $8.2 billion $8 billion -2 
      K-12 schools and community colleges $35 billion $34.5 billion $36 billion 4 
      University of California and California State University systems $10.5 billion $10.5 billion $11.8 billion 12 
      Labor & workforce development $64 million $57 million $59 million 4 
      Non-agency departments $535 million $497 million $578 million 16 
      Local government tax relief $463 million $470 million $534 million 14 
      Statewide expenditures (reflects savings, largely from changes to state worker pay and benefits) -$2.2 billion -$202 million -$1.2 billion 498 
      Total $84.5 billion $86.1 billion $82.9 billion -4% 

Source: California Department of Finance

Chronicle staff writer Nanette Asimov contributed to this report. E-mail the writers at wbuchanan at sfchronicle.com and mlagos at sfchronicle.com.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/01/08/MN6B1BFI2B.DTL&type=politics#ixzz0c6SEWKQK

----------------------------------

U.S. One of Two Countries Where Kids' Educational Attainment is Lower Than Their Parents'
By Daniela Perdomo, AlterNet
Posted on January 8, 2010, Printed on January 9, 2010
http://www.alternet.org/bloggers/www.alternet.org/145033/

According to a recent report, Americans aged 25-34 have attained less education than their parents' generation.

If the data cited by the American Association of State Colleges and Universities (AASCU) commission report is correct, the United States and Germany are the only two nations in the world where this holds true.

Indeed, while the United States ranks second among all nations in the proportion of population aged 35-64 with a college degree, we rank tenth in the percentage of those aged 25-34 with an associate's or high school degree.

To make matters worse, there's been a steady decline in American students pursuing degrees in science, technology, engineering and mathematics -- while places like China and India are investing heavily in the infrastructures to support premier programs in those courses of study.

So while the U.S. presently continues to attract more international students than anywhere else, more and more of the best and brightest foreign students may be tempted to stay in their home countries, making it less likely that they'll bring their technical expertise to the United States' workforce.

The report doesn't really try to guess why this lower educational attainment and lowering interest in science, math, and engineering degrees have come about, but does note that tuition has increased at a pace that may make an education a non-option for many. Indeed, between 1958 and 2001, tuition increased at about double the rate as inflation.

I hope my future kids get full rides somewhere.

Daniela Perdomo is a contributing writer and editor at AlterNet. You can follow her on Twitter.

© 2010 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/bloggers/www.alternet.org/145033/
-----------------------------------------
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-schools6-2010jan06,0,2797320.story

Assembly OKs bills to change California schools
Parents would be given more power to transfer children out of poorly performing campuses and petition for changes, including removal of the principal. Teachers unions oppose the provisions.
By Patrick McGreevy and Howard Blume 
January 5, 2010 | 10:51 p.m.

Reporting from Los Angeles and Sacramento - Despite strong objections from teachers unions, the state Assembly on Tuesday night approved changes to California schools that would give parents more power to transfer their children from badly performing campuses and petition for fixes that could include removing principals.

The changes are intended to help California win a share of $4.3 billion in new federal funds that will be available through the Race to the Top program. The Obama administration is using the promise of that money to push states into adopting education reforms the president and his aides favor.

The legislation will signal to President Obama "that California is ready to experiment with promising reforms," said UC Berkeley education professor Bruce Fuller, although he added that the legislation does not go far enough.

The measures target for improvement the lowest-performing schools in the state, as judged through student performance on standardized tests. They would give parents more say in how their schools are run.

The bills would require districts to take aggressive steps to turn around failing campuses. Those steps could include firing the principal and the staff; reopening the school as a charter; or closing the school and moving students to higher-performing campuses.

Students in the 1,000 lowest-performing schools in the state could transfer to better schools, even across district lines. The legislation would also allow districts to link teacher evaluations to student performance, if local collective bargaining agreements concurred. The L.A. teachers union has opposed such links.

And in 75 failing schools, districts would be required to revamp campuses in response to parent petitions. Currently, most districts are not required to act on parent complaints.

"For too long we in Sacramento have looked the other way when it comes to students in California who have languished in persistently underperforming schools," said Sen. Gloria Romero (D-Los Angeles), an author of the legislation. "Parents are the strongest agents of change."

The Senate, which previously supported similar proposals, is scheduled to take action today.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who has made the legislation a top priority, signaled that he would probably sign the two education reform bills if they pass the Senate as written.

"Today we have come together to pass sweeping education reforms to better our children's education, provide more choice for parents and make sure California is highly competitive for hundreds of millions in federal dollars for our schools," Schwarzenegger said.

The governor has championed the open-enrollment and parent-petition proposals. Those elements once again pit him against old political foes, including the California Teachers Assn., which said the measures would "drain resources from classrooms and punish lower-performing schools."

Backers said the legislation was urgently needed because of the looming Jan. 19 federal deadline and the provision that money would be doled out based on how much the states have done to improve school performance.

Earlier Tuesday, the Los Angeles Board of Education approved a measure that commits the district to abide by the changes. More than half of the school districts in the state also have agreed to make the necessary reforms, state Supt. of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell said.

"Clearly we need the money, but more than that our kids need a better school district and a better education," said L.A. school board member Yolie Flores Aguilar.

One provision of the measures allows parents at poor-performing schools to force changes in school operations. If at least 50% of the parents at a school sign a petition, the school board must choose one of a handful of options, including closing the campus, converting it to a charter or replacing the principal and other administrators.

As a compromise, supporters of the measure agreed to limit the number of schools at which parent petitions would force action to 75.

That petition proposal was born of battles within the Los Angeles Unified School District, which has adopted a similar but more limited concept.

Ben Austin, executive director of the foundation-funded parent organizing effort Parent Revolution, hailed the Assembly action.

"It's an entirely new way of thinking about public education. It's about giving parents real power to advocate for their children," said Austin, whose group has close ties to Green Dot Public Schools, a charter school management organization based in Southern California. Charters are public schools that operate independently of many district rules and are mostly nonunion.

SB 5X 4 would give parents in 1,000 of the worst-performing schools in the state more power to transfer their children to better campuses in the same or other districts.

The open-enrollment provision enlarges a practice that already is common within school districts, including L.A. Unified, the state's largest school system.

The measure passed by one vote, 41 to 27; Assemblyman Mike Davis (D-Los Angeles) provided the winning margin after he was surrounded by Democratic leaders urging him to support the measure.

Jeff Freitas, an advocate for the California Federation of Teachers, said the measures would divide parents and teachers at schools. While some students could transfer to other campuses, Freitas said, "you are leaving students behind with no reform for that school."

California Teachers Assn. representative Patricia A. Rucker accused lawmakers of being blinded by the promise of onetime federal funding.

"If it was not for the money that you are chasing in this onetime application, would you have seriously considered taking such an expeditious, such a short-circuited and ill-considered approach?" Rucker asked the Assembly Education Committee.

Responded Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento): "We are not in a position to turn our backs on the potential of $700 million to help kids in high-poverty schools."

The other bill, SB 5X 1, identifies poor-performing schools and requires them to pursue improvements, develop new curriculum to better prepare students for college or jobs and improve use of student performance data to evaluate teachers and principals.

The two most controversial provisions also were opposed by the California School Boards Assn. Erika Hoffman, an association advocate, urged lawmakers to drop the open enrollment and parental petitioning provisions, saying that they "aren't necessary" to win federal funds.

Lawmakers who voted against the measures worried that the changes would create chaos as students abandoned poor-performing schools in droves and flooded better school districts that might have trouble accommodating them.

The open enrollment proposal was opposed by Assembly Education Committee Chairwoman Julia Brownley (D-Santa Monica), who said the 1,000 schools affected may not necessarily be the worst-performing, which could result in a widening of the achievement gap that would hurt poor and minority students.

"I am still very concerned about what I believe might be potential unintended consequences," Brownley said.

patrick.mcgreevy

@latimes.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.aktivix.org/pipermail/educationforall/attachments/20100109/583c7488/attachment-0001.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 116 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.aktivix.org/pipermail/educationforall/attachments/20100109/583c7488/attachment-0010.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 115 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.aktivix.org/pipermail/educationforall/attachments/20100109/583c7488/attachment-0011.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 96 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.aktivix.org/pipermail/educationforall/attachments/20100109/583c7488/attachment-0012.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 114 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.aktivix.org/pipermail/educationforall/attachments/20100109/583c7488/attachment-0013.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 43 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.aktivix.org/pipermail/educationforall/attachments/20100109/583c7488/attachment-0014.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 92 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.aktivix.org/pipermail/educationforall/attachments/20100109/583c7488/attachment-0015.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 142 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.aktivix.org/pipermail/educationforall/attachments/20100109/583c7488/attachment-0016.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 145 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.aktivix.org/pipermail/educationforall/attachments/20100109/583c7488/attachment-0017.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 5523 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.aktivix.org/pipermail/educationforall/attachments/20100109/583c7488/attachment-0018.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 54 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.aktivix.org/pipermail/educationforall/attachments/20100109/583c7488/attachment-0019.gif>